well-described rams, stipulating that he would take one live ram each day and fixing a definite period that begins on the very day the contract is concluded, Malik holds that the price may be deferred in that case. The same ruling applies if the salam concerns aradibs of wheat or anything similar, as I have already outlined; but if the buyer does not in fact begin to take delivery each day, delaying the payment is not permissible.

If the seller (the one upon whom delivery is due) has taken possession of the salam capital and it is lost while still in his hand before the parties separate, the loss is his. In Malik’s view the physical parting of the two parties carries no legal weight in a salam contract, nor in any other sale, except in currency exchange (ṣarf) and comparable transactions in which deferment is forbidden, such as food for food. It is also reported from Malik that whichever party has taken possession of the currency or the food in such dealings bears any subsequent loss once it is in his hand before they separate, and this is the distilled position of his school according to most of his disciples.

Neither gold nor silver may be the subject of salam for gold, yet either of them may be advanced as the price in salam for any other commodity whatsoever—whether that commodity is sold by weight or otherwise—so long as it can be precisely defined: food or drink, goods measured by volume or weight, livestock, merchandise, cloth, and the like. In short, any item that may lawfully be sold and whose attributes can be strictly specified may be purchased by salam on the basis of a clear description, as we have explained.

Salam is not permissible for raw ore extracted from mines. As for the jewellers’ sweepings, they may neither be bought hand-to-hand, nor contracted for by salam, nor taken on loan, because their exact nature cannot be ascertained.